- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@allette.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 03:16:06 +1100
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Tim Bray wrote: > > The November 14th draft is available in HTML, zipped PostScript, > gzipped PostScript, zipped RTF, and gzipped RTF, at > > http://www.textuality.com/sgml-erb/ Well done. > For what it's worth, Michael and I are agreed, but the ERB hasn't > yet considered the question, that the huge list > of 10646 character roles should migrate into an appendix, with > a pointer in the main text. Aside from being hideously ugly, > it breaks up the flow [and also, things that are in the > appendix don't count against XML's 20-page budget.] Does > anyone have a reason not to do this? - Tim Good idea. The Technical Corrigendum (TC) to SGML on Extended Naming Rules (ENR) looks like it has succeeded. If so, there is now a legit SGML declaration possible for defining all those extra name characters, if they are used. (EditTime editor already handles ENR/Unicode, if anyone is interested.) ENR TC is at http://www.ornl.gov/sgml/wg8/document/1896.htm By the way, if the XML data has been generated valid, am I right in thinking a non-validing XML parser is completely OK with the robust and simple lexical rule that a name is anything up to a delimiter or 's' (after entity references in (non-CDATA) attribute values have been resolved)? If so, that should be made clear in the 1.0 spec, since it drastically simplifies things for implementors. Also, I think the &u form entities should just have the "u" prefix, not the "u-" prefix. I don't think it adds anything, and, potentially add thousands of characters to any entity declarations. -- Regards Rick Jelliffe email: ricko@allette.com.au _______________________________________________________________ Allette Systems (Australia) email: info@allette.com.au Level 10, 91 York Street www: http://www.allette.com.au Sydney 2000 NSW Australia phone: +61 2 262 4777 fax: +61 2 262 4774 _______________________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 17 November 1996 11:12:45 UTC